tv [untitled] September 18, 2011 4:00am-4:30am PDT
i just met him today. seems like a nice guy. my concern is being responsible and what happens in this neighborhood. me growing up there 40 years, i get up early in the morning. i walk the neighborhood. when i walk the neighborhood walking down the street, the smell down the street. a few times i walk out of my house, i step right in vomit. a lot of the bars, i have a bar on one side. i'm thinking i can get another restaurant bar here. i have a family too, a daughter. i see people out there throwing up and stuff. that to me is part of being responsible. last week sometimes there's a killing right behind our alley on camp street. some dispute, somebody got over a bar. all that goes on and a doorman get killed in the past from the bars. so to me a lot of this is being
responsible. they're good neighbors, i'm sure and nothing towards them. i want to make sure they're responsible, times and stuff and what they control. one of the other issues is people in the neighborhood in the whole mission, what the culture was, me seen growing up there, i went to elementary school, marshall annex, everett, and now i see hard-working families being pushed out of there. if met this guy on the street, he would give him a roof until he got himself together. that's how he is. i just want you guys to take everything in considerationp and thank you, guys. >> is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed.
commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i appreciate all of the comments today and i'm so happy that we continued this and things seemed to have worked out well and it's heartening to see a couple family businesses, the ones that just testified who have been there many years and new family business equally small that only as far as i know have the two woodhouse fish companies and this restaurant. so that to me i consider that a small business. so i think that a lot of the things that were brought up as possible problems, these are things we have to watch out with any establishment to make sure that people are properly supervised, alcohol consumption, things that all responsible restaurants and bars would take care of. no reason to believe that, that should be any difference. i have been very encouraged having dined at a lot of different places along valencia and i have been impressed with the ones i have been to, quality of the food, relatively
affordable, clean and i think they've made the kind of improvements and they also go to some of the older establishments and patronize them too. it should help everyone when a new place goes in because people say hey, how about that place next door? maybe i will try that the next time. or a place they're going to is crowded they say, i've got to eat now. let's find something close by and they discover a place they never have heard of before. since they were never there, they wouldn't have ever found the other place. and in supporting this project, i see that they modify the menu and these things are all fine. the approvals are for a restaurant. we never dictate an approval who has to be a type of restaurant or type of price point in all those sorts of things. the changes you made sound like they're going to be good ones.
however, my understanding is once it's conditioned, if you did decide to change the type of restaurant or the price point, that does not need an additional -- aconditional use. the conditional use is for an establishment that fits the criteria of the type of restaurant but not necessarily to the point of the type of food that's being served in these types of things. so those are my feelings. i think this is going to continue with what i think are really positive developments on valencia street and adding a lot of employment, which is really an important element too. so i'm going to move to approve. president olague: commissioner fong? commissioner fong: thank you. i want to applaud the family who after 41 years operating the same business in the same neighborhood, i'm sure your expenses running that business far exceeded what you raised your prices on your menu.
in coming from a small business as well. i would like to point out the irony or coincidence, family business here or another family's business coming into the area and i think it's really nice to see and i hope this family, and i think you do, understand and respect really the people who have been in the neighborhood that really sort of know and feel and give you a heads up and warning, it's not good to be open on a certain night or stay open that they have that long history of experience. i wanted to point that out. i think it's great we're seeing more businesses open. and particularly by families and families that have that pride of ownership that cannot necessarily be replaced with a big corporate type of business. i am in support of it. i would be willing to second the motion to approve. president olague: i think commissioner miguel did but i would be willing to move to approve this establishment unless an 11:00 p.m. hour for closing the bar is -- is
actually considered. so i'm asking the maker of the motion to consider that as an amendment, an 11:00 p.m. closer of the bar. >> would i have to talk to project sponsor. i never heard of this before today. president olague: i'm hearing it from the neighbors. i'm hearing it from the people that live upstairs, that it's an imposition to have yet another establishment placed on the block of valencia that is open until 1:00 in the morning. i'm asking an 11:00 p.m. bar closure be imposed that would be in accordance with even, i believe, miss vigil's restaurant has an 11:00 p.m. bar closure. so that's what i'm seeking actually. >> i would ask project sponsor and i will also have to know what's customary in the neighborhood too. there are a lot of different establishments. this isn't the only one to be open after 11:00.
sir, can i get your comments on that? >> yes, we find that pretty difficult. there's a restaurant -- there's a bar on the other side that's open until 2:00 with live music. we voluntarily said 1:00. there are great many other restaurants on the street that are open considerably longer than 11:00. that is actually the style of the street. president olague: you think it's becoming the style of the street? but for the longest time, bombay restaurant -- bombay was actually a retail establishment. it was not a restaurant. i think asking for a license, type 47 license to come in -- >> correct. president olague: is sort of conditional use. it's not an as of rights or actually giving you some kind of a -- >> for us, you know, i think you probably want the most responsible operator in there. we already have licenses and we never had any violation of noise or otherwise myself, i'm a nondrinker, as are two of my
sons. as operators, even open until later is not our pred licks to have a bar scene and certainly taking care of the streets is incumbent on us to really run a good business. so i think will be the best operators regardless of the time. but we would have major impact on us if we had to close early. >> president olague, if i may, we have staff or information on current projects that you just approved with bars that have hours of operation. gloria, if you -- >> maybe i could have staff give me some information as to whether to accept this amendment or not as to what's customary here. >> sure, we don't have a rundown of every restaurant on the block or in the district but in terms of recent projects before you in the immediate area, tacolicious was limited to 12:00 p.m. and imam was limited -- kind of varied. 10:30 monday through thursday. 11:00 p.m. for friday and
saturday and 10:00 p.m. for sunday. president olague: so i think that's sort of the standard. i don't know why we're giving special exception to a restaurant that's just coming into the block. >> if i could ask a couple of questions. you set puerto allegre is open until 1:00? >> no, no. there's a -- blondie's is open until 2:00 on the weekends. the bar. >> maybe i could ask one of the representatives from puerto olegre, what is your closing time? >> 11:00. >> i don't know. sounds like this is primarily a food establishment if i'm not mistaken, as is the situation with woodbridge, fishhouse and other woodbridge company -- >> it's just woodhouse and this is driven by the food. there's no way we want an outrageous bar. we're not in that business. >> how about if we do something
like midnight, what do you think? that sounds like a reasonable compromise to me. >> midnight. sunday through thursday midnight. and 12:30 on the other nights. >> i'm not going to support a motion -- if we impose certain standards on lemone is a restaurant, not a bar. a restaurant not a bar, i ask we hold this establishment to the same standards we hold other restaurants to in that area. that's all i'm asking. >> are you referring to the bar aspect of the restaurant but not the rest of the restaurant? >> i think what we have here is blondie's is a bar. you have a bar across the street. you have like all kinds of -- you have somebody mentioned up to 22 establishments now that serve liquor. it's becoming almost a saturation point. it's not a reflection of you. it just happens that you came in
at a point where i think this is really something that the planning department needs to look at closely, the transformation of a neighborhood , the increase in alcohol serving establishments and i'm just saying that, you know, we have lemone restaurant that was sitting there for like two or three years in operation before they even asked for a type 47 liquor license, after they had sort of proven themselves. i think this other restaurant has been there for four years and they're shutting down at 11:00. they have a separate little bar area also. so i think 11:00 is -- i think that's a reasonable request. of a restaurant since the lemone is 10:30. i am just trying to kind of standardize some stuff for restaurants which we don't have. >> could i ask your comment on that, sir? >> i had two points. one is we secured a liquor
license already and it's type 48. so we're actually taking a type 48 which is a full bar with no food component and downgrading that to a 47. we feel the net effect on the neighborhood -- this is a liquor license from the commission, by the way. the net effect would be less hours of operation for a business serving alcohol. the other point is that if you look at the street, there are a number of liquor licenses. charles stand is opening up his door space and granted liquor license. i don't have the hours in front of me but i do believe it's after 11:00. i don't know if someone can verify that. but it was about one month ago he was here. >> i'm going to make a modification of my motion slightly different than what's been asked by commissioner olague. and what i think make sense to me is week nights, 11:00. seems to make sense for -- if you want to serve food later, you could. but you're probably not going to go any later for alcoholic
beverage and then probably go -- midnight, which is the same as foreign cinema and some of the other places that have been alluded to on friday and saturday nights. so if that's ok with the seconder? >> yeah, i have a question, will you be serving food until you close? >> definitely, of course. >> you say of course. some places don't. because your physical setup, the bar is somewhat separate. >> it is. that is more of a casual dining area. there will be tables all through there. sort of a waiting dining area. for more walk-ins and things like that. >> just as a followup if i may, there have been a number of establishments who have begun with certain hours of operation to the conservative side and if there's always a possibility of coming back i guess with a year later probably two for extended hours -- i
>> go back to ask for a request to modify. >> you could always come back. but starting with the more conservative one would probably be good. >> one other thing is we have to do the similar process, the san francisco police department and alcoholic beverage commission and they like to appeal back with whatever you present them with. so sometimes it's a little more advantageous for us to say what we have designed to stay open is our latest time and sometimes make concessions a little bit later on down the road with the san francisco police department. we have been through that process before. >> if there is discussion, i would be happy to represent this discussion where you have made a modification already to come down on your hours. >> thank you. president olague: commissioner moore? commissioner moore: i'm actually kind of confused. are we starting with the earlier closing time and saying that creates a benchmark for similarities between the joining enterprises, or are we saying it
should be retrofitted later? i'm kind of lost. >> let me clarify the motion for you. the motion has been modified. there was a motion to approve and i think original approval was until 1:00. i'm not sure. but what my motion is, is for friday and saturday night, which tend to be later nights, nights when children may be up a little later and families are out and things like that, we go to midnight, which is the same as foreign sin ama and a number of other establishments along that strip, although foreign cinema is on mission street. i would think locuinda is that late and quite a few are that late. week nights sunday through thursday, closing time 11:00. >> that's for the bar, right? >> well, for the bar but it would include, i would assume, alcohol service to those who are still dining. >> yes. >> they have to cut off the service of alcohol at that time but they're not going to kick somebody out who hasn't finished their meal.
>> we think that to mean closing our kitchen as well. >> you're probably going to close your kitchen. >> right. ok. commissioner moore: he's still trying to get feedback on the recent application, i would be curious what we hear about that restaurant. i would actually prefer to hear what the general town of opening and closing is in that neighborhood. i live in a neighborhood where there are two or three restaurants but they all close at the same time. and that is fair because it is indeed primarily residential neighborhood. this is actually a little more mixed use than where i live. but again, i'm concerned that those restaurants which were there at a time when they perhaps were the only kid on the block, can they apply now for staying up later or do they always have to close based on what they have? i think we're creating this little uneven here and i would be more comfortable if we have a
general kind of, carkse district closes down and that's it. do you have an answer to that? >> in terms of the hours of operation, current hours of operation for all uses is until 2:00 a.m. in the morning. if you wanted to standardize it, it would require a code change unless you did individual conditions on conditions of approval for motions. but that is the standard closing right now for the valencia c.t. >> any organization can petition for longer hours. that often happens. so just to be clear, nobody is permanently restricted to what they have. they can further petition for other hours. >> which means existing facilities could come and say because everybody's staying open later, we would like to do that too. that is a very important piece of information. not that, that works for the people who are talking to us
today but at least foints to another direction of how business is going, generally in the district. that's all i'm trying to get my hands around. i just wanted to say, -- president olague: i just wanted to say i'm grateful that additional outreach was done and there were meetings with miss vigil and missions nvls and all of these other groups. i think these really good proprietors and they will be an asset to the neighborhood. and i'm happy that they came in with that spirit of, you know, trying to work with -- i was a little disappointed though because there's a part of me, and this has nothing to do with them because i think they did everything they're directed to do and i think that they came in, you know, with really working with the menu and talking to the neighbors and i think it's going to be a successful interaction ultimately. but i think sometimes it's kind
of concerning to me, this is where i think maybe at some point i would like to talk to the department about maybe a more comprehensive look. i think right now the hot area is valencia and mission district. so i think what's happening is that there isn't a commissioner moore raised this several times, that there's not a comprehensive vision for how this neighborhood should evolve. and i think there needs to be a little bit of a step back. just recently we approved or legalized the roof deck at mid-jewel. and we will see changes there. and there's talk about a i think bowling alley on mission street. so valencia, i know i have heard also that the landlord of the -- or that the person from the bombay is actually in litigation with the landlord of that site. and so i guess there is that concern. we obviously can't deal with it here of certain -- that sort of
pressure now that we might be seen on existing merchants to remain in certain areas. because there's so much competition to go in because we're a foody city, as we have talked about before and everyone's so interested in what goes on around food in san francisco. this is like a national, almost international phenomenon now. so i think how this industry grows in certain areas, how can we be more sensitive so when folks like the mcnevins come in there's more clarity around what they're stepping into as well. i just think there has to be more thought given into all of the above. i know there's groups that have been in the mission forever that weren't approached by anyone, i don't think. and another group like in the area that are like just a block away that were never approached. i don't think it's the fault of the project sponsor at all. i just think that at some point maybe we need to look at how do
you give more inclusive outreach so that all of these concerns are kind of like looked at in a way that's more constructive. i think that my concern is there's people who live above the bombay that never -- bombay is sort of downstairs but there's a lot of residence areas, which is above lemone, which is probably why they have gone to a 10:30 time. the hotel has several residents. individuals live above valencia too, above certain businesses. i think -- and there are a lot of families. valencia and 16th there's a family housing on hoff and 16th. there's a lot of family housing around that area. obviously 15th and valencia is there also. so i think we have to look at how the streets evolving in terms of liquor and some of the other issues. i don't think what we're asking
for is that uncommon. i think when some of these issues have come on mission street, people asked for restrictions at least the first six, seven months. people ask for reports all the time on uses that are far less than this. so i don't think what we are asking for, for initial things is that -- is that aggressive. but will the department consider looking at this stuff more comprehensively? >> sure. the zoning that was put in place was put in place when you approved the neighborhood plan three years ago, n.c.t. zoning. so the question becomes what would the commission want to do beyond that, that is more -- i think it would require a more detailed look at restaurant uses and whether -- restaurant uses tend to all over the city and all over other cities tend to cluster if there's an organic clustering that happens with restaurant uses. the question is if the
commission is saying you think there's an oversaturation of certain types of restaurants or certain types of uses, then we need to take a look at that. i'm sitting right here now, i can't tell you what that look would be, whether we would recommend limitation. i don't know. president olague: i don't know either. north beach -- because we're just seeing a lot of even retail sites evolving into restaurants right now. >> that's right. >> so we are seeing more restaurants in that area and more restaurants serving alcohol than we probably ever have. i don't know if that's good or bad. i don't know how to look at that on some level. >> i'm happy to have -- i'm happy to discuss that with staff and figure out what we can look at and come back to you with a proposal. president olague: i know mr. grande, did you have anything to add? you have been working with mission organizations for a long time. is there anything you would suggest around this conversation? if you could come up to the mic.
>> thank you for the opportunity. i think we have been -- the line we have been saying for over a decade, we need to stop the project by project planning, so like you said it best, when the mcnevins come in here, they know what they're stepping into and it's equitable for everybody. what we're seeing is we want the planning department to be able to have the tools so when you have those front line planners, they're not limited to let's look at it just -- let's look at the social impacts. let's see if there's an equitable, irspom planning happening on these quarters. are there certain businesses that are being impacted, priced out, at the benefit of other types of businesses that have deeper pockets, that have three, four other restaurants to delve into, to put money down to do repairs, while mr. peresh, who was displaced from bombay bazaar
and is now underneath the freeway on 13th and south van ness, that's what we want the department to look at. so when projects do come in that everybody is playing by the same rules, but at the same time we're looking at especially businesses that are offering retail, you know, goods that are at family affordable prices. because that's what we lose. where do you get your keys made? where do you get your shoes fixed? where do you wash your clothes or get your nails done? that's what we lose. it doesn't become a community anymore. it becomes a destination spot, bridge and tunnel folks come here, party. and then leave. who has to pick up the pieces? it's families like the vigils, who live there. president olague: thank you. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: thank you. i think the discussion is entirely correct.
i can go over many streets in the last 15, 20 years, most notably fillmore, heys, valley, divisadero, and now valencia and restaurants have come in and sort of transformed these streets from places that were not really friendly in the past and made them into places that are attractive to do business in, live in and that's part of what can happen. and i'm glad this kind of thing goes on. i do hear the concerns about making sure that there's balance in the neighborhood and that we don't end up with only food and drink establishments and some of the neighborhoods serving businesses are able to stay in there. but also there's no reason to believe that existing restaurant can't survive and it actually thrives when new restaurants come in. because you bring in customers who would never be there before and they find out about a place. and they start going to it.
so i'm glad we're able to approve this, i would hope. i would like to continue the dialogue as far as valencia. we also want to make sure we don't fall into protectionism too. that we make sure that competition is part of american life and we have to walk that fine line and make sure we're not just protectionists and that we're being fair to everybody. we're also having equal playing field as possible. president olague: commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: yes, i think it's a very, very difficult situation any time an area such as this is seeing new development come in. and i know traditional businesses have been there for a long, long time and it's difficult. you know, you can talk about competition but being a good thing but i think it's especially difficult for traditional businesses to hang on.
that said it's also difficult from the perspective of the planning department and the commission is to try to micromanage the whole process of city development. i just don't believe it can be done, and i don't believe we should be doing it. there are parameters that planning sets up like eastern neighborhood plan and zoning districts and i think that's what director was refering to within that framework, then a new development like we're considering tonight sees those various planning and zoning restrictions and says, ok, we can do this kind of restaurant, which they obviously did in the beginning and came in under those rules. so i think there were rules, not fights, not quite the social justice kind of things that you guys are talking about. but within the parameters of the planning process, i think they probably were playing fair. i don't think landlord was
playing fair but on the other hand, that's another issue. president olague: right. commissioner sugaya: but then to try to get more detailed, we ended up with situations in other neighborhood areas where restaurants and bars are restricted, or numbers are restricted. so and that is the case, that was done decades ago, i believe. but now we're coming -- now supervisors are coming back and saying, hey, there's a demand for more restaurants and whatnot. we're going to introduce a new ordinance. instead of 22 restaurants, now we will allow 25. so sometimes i think, well, how much control can we have? i know we need some and i hate the word balance, but swrr in there we're all trying to struggle with it. at this point it seems like it's here that kind of discussionan